INCORPORATING SPECTROSCOPY AND MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY INTO THE HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY LABORATORY A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri – Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By EMILY ANN HARBERT Dr. Renee JiJi, Dissertation Supervisor JULY 2014 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled INCORPORATING SPECTROSCOPY AND MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY INTO THE HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY LABORATORY presented by Emily A. Harbert, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Professor Renee D. JiJi Professor Carol A. Deakyne Professor Steven W. Keller Professor Peter V. Cornish I want to thank all of my family, especially Mom and Dad, for encouraging me to chase my dreams and never, ever give up. And to all of my dearest friends, for your unwavering support and encouragement, thank you. I would never have been able to achieve this without each and every one of you! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Renee JiJi for her patience and invaluable insights throughout my graduate program. In addition to Dr. JiJi, I want to acknowledge the rest of the members of the CHIP team: Dr. Peter Cornish, Dr. Deanna Lankford, and Anahita Zare as well as Stephanie Harman for their help in making the program a success. I would also like to thank my group members for their support. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the University of Missouri and the National Science Foundation (CHE-1151533) for funding. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. ii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... vi LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... vii ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... viii INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 1: Barriers to Education and Implementation of Laboratory Measurement Technology in the Science Classroom: Assessing Current Needs of Science Teachers Introduction ..............................................................................................................6 Educational Technology and Measurement Technology .............................7 Incorporating Laboratory Technology into Instruction ...............................9 Professional Development and Teacher Training on Equipment ................9 The Needs-Assessment Survey ..............................................................................10 Methods......................................................................................................10 Survey Questionnaire .....................................................................10 Participants .....................................................................................11 Results and Discussion ..........................................................................................12 Professional Development Preferences ......................................................12 Barriers to Effective Science Teaching......................................................13 Measurement Technology in the High School Chemistry Laboratory ......14 Inciting and Maintaining Student Interest in Science and Chemistry ........16 Summary ................................................................................................................18 iii References ..............................................................................................................19 CHAPTER 2: The Chemistry Immersion Program Introduction ............................................................................................................21 Program Overview .................................................................................................22 Selection Criteria .......................................................................................23 Participants .................................................................................................23 Program Design and Implementation ....................................................................24 Results and Discussion ..........................................................................................27 Pre and Post Exams ....................................................................................27 Stoichiometry .................................................................................29 Chemical Bonding .........................................................................30 Thermochemistry ...........................................................................31 Ideal Gas Law ................................................................................31 Focus Group Interview ..............................................................................32 Post-Program Evaluation ...........................................................................35 Summary ................................................................................................................39 References ..............................................................................................................41 CHAPTER 3: Spectroscopy and the Next Generation Science Standards: Incorporating Spectroscopy into the High School Science Classroom Introduction ............................................................................................................42 Experimental Design ..............................................................................................43 iv Part 1: Synthesizing Oil of Wintergreen ....................................................44 Method ...........................................................................................44 Part 2: Video Introduction to Spectroscopy ...............................................45 Part 3: Analysis of Wintergreen .................................................................46 Results and Discussion ..........................................................................................47 Students’ Evaluation of Laboratory Activity .............................................52 Summary ................................................................................................................54 References ..............................................................................................................56 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................57 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................59 A.1.1 Needs-Assessment Survey Questions and Results.......................................60 A.2.1 CHIP Student Laboratory Instructions .........................................................63 A.2.2 CHIP Pre- and Post-Test Assessment ..........................................................77 A.2.3 CHIP Focus Group Interview Questions .....................................................86 A.2.4 CHIP Program Evaluation Data ...................................................................87 A.3.1 Introductory Raman Spectroscopy Lab Protocol .........................................89 A.3.2 Spectroscopy Lab Evaluation Questions.....................................................92 A.3.3 DVD of “Introduction to Spectroscopy” Prezi Video ..................Back Cover VITA..................................................................................................................................93 v LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 All respondents (n=180) were asked to choose how they prefer to receive professional development from among the options listed. They could choose more than one option .......................................................................................................12 1.2 All respondents (High School, n=109; Middle School, n=32; Elementary, n=39) were asked to indicate which obstacles they faced when teaching science. They were allowed to choose more than one of the options, or none at all. ...................14 1.3 Technology availability and usage as a function of class size. Teachers were asked to indicate how many students were in their typical science class and then asked whether they had laboratory technology available and if so, how often the students used that technology during lab. ..............................................................16 1.4 Teachers ranked the four options presented for increasing student interest in science from the first choice being most effective to the fourth choice being the least effective. Cumulative rankings are shown with the greatest weight (x4) given to the first choice (shown in red) and the lowest weight (x1) given to the fourth choice (shown in yellow) .......................................................................................17 2.1 Student responses were scored individually and averaged for each question from the four sections. The averages for the pre- and post-tests were then compared. Percent increases in correct responses are illustrated in green to the right of the zero